The Superstructure:

• Introduction
• There is little to no funding left for new sustainable green projects
• Our group ask for a feasibility study exploring possibilities for:
• Including extra fees to Wayne State tuition
• Implementing a self-replicating fund process
• Creating a new committee with bylaws to follow
• Research Methods
• Primary Research
• Interview with Larry Fedor (Director of Energy Conservation)
• Surveys
• Students in and around Wayne State University
• Secondary Research
• Credible websites
• Academic funding sites
• Academic newsletter
• Academic blogs 
• Public newsletters  
• Alternatives
• Student Fee
• The student fee is one of our main alternatives to providing money for the sustainability of Wayne State University.  This fee would be a separate fee on our student bill charged to all enrolled Wayne State Students for all the Semesters. ( Fall, Winter, Spring/Summer) 
• Self-replicating fund
• This fund is more of a long term alternative fueled by an immediate influx of funding from the University and the students.  The payback to the university would be within 4 -6 years of the implemented sustainability projects. 
• Criteria
• This course of action will meet the goals intended towards reaching a solution by:  
• Added fees in student tuition will help the funding. 
• Self-replicating funds will help fund new projects quickly.  Getting a portion of the outcome back into the fund.
• Establishing a new committee will help set standards on how the funds will be used
• This course of action can be implemented in two ways.
• Added fees could be implemented depending on whether majority of the students support
• Establishing a new committee is possible because new ones keep on forming.
• This course of action is affordable.
• Funding will come from the fee that will be added to the students' tuition.
• Other funding could, possibly, come from Wayne State alumni. Also, Graduate students can also have this fee added to their tuition statement.
• Possible side effects that could cause a decrease in desire to adopt our plan.
• Small percentage of student Drop-Outs due to the added fee.
• For the self-replicating fund process, we may not get money back from supported projects.
• Short-Term Impacts
• Funding
• Tuition Fee
• Recently added fee might shock students for a while. 
• Self-Replicating Fund
• Will not be replicating just yet, not until the first project gets approval. After a couple of years we might see some of that money coming back. 
• Committee
• Decisions on Funding: fresh start 
• Long-Term Impacts 
• Funding
• Tuition Fee
• Students will get used to this and accept it.  
• Self-Replicating
• In a couple of years we may see money coming back to the fund. 
• Committee
• Stronger foundation and more projects being approved. 

Overview of Alternatives

Alternative #1 – Student Fees

            Research will continue exploring the cost, implementation, and desirability of this alternative by examining practices at select universities.  Selecting two universities that have a student fee to raise funds for sustainability projects, perhaps one higher than the median and one lower.  A survey will be completed to examine the willingness of Wayne State students to support an additional fee to promote sustainability projects to the campus of Wayne State.  Best practices at our selected universities and the acceptance of the student body should be examined for possible implementation and desirability at Wayne State.  The problem of fund distribution will need to be examined.  A committee that is student centric should be researched.

Alternative #2 – Revolving Fund

            The same criteria should be researched in this category as in the first.  Selection of universities that utilize a revolving fund without student fees is required.  An examination of these universities should reveal the source of the initial funds and the process of how to access those monies.  Additionally, research should determine in what manner and conditions for the repayment of the funds.  The research from alternative #1 will aid in determining how desirable the implementation would be for students.   Again, distribution of the funds must be considered.  In this case, a more faculty/staff based committee should be examined to handle the funds.

Alternative #3 – Hybrid

            The hybrid alternative should be an examination of the combining of the first two alternatives.  If possible, universities that employ this method should be studied to access is procedures and policies.  Like the alternatives before this, distribution of the funds should be considered along with the formation of a committee.  This committee, like the fund, should be a combination of both students and faculty members.